| ▲ | FiloSottile 3 hours ago | |||||||
This article is more aimed at those specifying and implementing WebAuthN and SSH, than at those using them. They/we need to migrate those protocols to PQ now, so that you all can start migrating to PQ keys in time, including the long tail of users that will not rotate their keys and hardware the moment the new algorithms are supported. For example, it might be too late to get anything into Debian for it to be in oldstable when the CRQCs come! | ||||||||
| ▲ | palata 44 minutes ago | parent [-] | |||||||
> This article is more aimed at those specifying and implementing WebAuthN and SSH, than at those using them. Sure, I'm just trying to understand the consequences of that. Felt great to finally have secure elements on smartphones and laptops (or Yubikeys), protecting against the OS being compromised (i.e. "you access my OS, but at least you can't steal my keys"). I was wondering if PQ meant that when it becomes reality, we just get back to a world where if our OS is compromised, then our keys get compromised, too. Or if there is a middle ground in the threat model, e.g. "it's okay to keep using your Yubikey, because an attacker would need to have physical access to your key, specialised hardware AND access to a quantum computer in order to break it". Versus "you can stop bothering about security keys because with "store now, decrypt later", everything you do today with your security keys will anyway get broken with quantum computers eventually". | ||||||||
| ||||||||